Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · ofr20111200

Assessment of groundwater, soil-gas, and soil contamination at the Vietnam Armor Training Facility, Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2009-2010

Abstract

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of the Army Environmental and Natural Resources Management Office of the U.S. Army Signal Center and Fort Gordon, Georgia, assessed the groundwater, soil gas, and soil for contaminants at the Vietnam Armor Training Facility (VATF) at Fort Gordon, from October 2009 to September 2010. The assessment included the detection of organic compounds in the groundwater and soil gas, and inorganic compounds in the soil. In addition, organic contaminant assessment included organic compounds classified as explosives and chemical agents in selected areas. The assessment was conducted to provide environmental contamination data to the U.S. Army at Fort Gordon pursuant to requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Part B Hazardous Waste Permit process. Four passive samplers were deployed in groundwater wells at the VATF in Fort Gordon. Total petroleum hydrocarbons were detected above the method detection level at all four wells. The only other volatile organic compounds detected above their method detection level were undecane and pentadecane, which were detected in two of the four wells sampled. Soil-gas samplers were deployed at 72 locations in a grid pattern across the VATF. Total petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in 71 of the 72 samplers (one sampler was destroyed in the field and not analyzed) at levels above the method detection level, and the combined mass of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and total xylene was detected above the detection level in 31 of the 71 samplers that were analyzed. Other volatile organic compounds detected above their respective method detection levels were naphthalene, 2-methyl-naphthalene, tridecane, 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, and perchloroethene. Subsequent to the soil-gas survey, four areas determined to have elevated contaminant mass were selected and sampled for explosives and chemical agents. No detections of explosives or chemical agents above their respective method detection levels were found at any of the sampling locations. The same four locations that were sampled for explosives and chemical agents were selected for the collection of soil samples. A fifth location also was selected on the basis of the elevated contaminant mass of the soil-gas survey. No metals that exceeded the Regional Screening Levels for Industrial Soils as classified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency were detected at any of the five VATF locations. The soil samples also were compared to values from the ambient, uncontaminated (background) levels for soils in South Carolina, as classified by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control. Because South Carolina is adjacent to Georgia and the soils in the coastal plain are similar, these comparisons are valid. No similar values are available for Georgia to use for comparison purposes. The metals that were detected above the ambient background levels for South Carolina, as classified by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, include aluminum, arsenic, barium, beryllium, calcium, chromium, copper, iron, lead, magnesium, manganese, nickel, potassium, sodium, and zinc.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 33.247301699949205° to 33.54940663754663° latitude; -82.42355346679688° to -82.01774597167969° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Wladmir B. Guimaraes, W. Fred Falls, Andral W. Caldwell, W. Hagan Ratliff, John B. Wellborn, James Landmeyer. 2011. Assessment of groundwater, soil-gas, and soil contamination at the Vietnam Armor Training Facility, Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2009-2010. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20111200

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona